alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 808 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 808

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
  To direct the Secretary of the Interior to allow for prepayment of 
  repayment contracts between the United States and the Uintah Water 
                         Conservancy District.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. PREPAYMENT OF CERTAIN REPAYMENT CONTRACTS BETWEEN THE UNITED 
              STATES AND THE UINTAH WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT.

    The Secretary of the Interior shall allow for prepayment of the 
repayment contract no. 6-05-01-00143 between the United States and the 
Uintah Water Conservancy District dated June 3, 1976, and supplemented 
and amended on November 1, 1985, and on December 30, 1992, providing 
for repayment of municipal and industrial water delivery facilities for 
which repayment is provided pursuant to such contract, under terms and 
conditions similar to those used in implementing section 210 of the 
Central Utah Project Completion Act (Public Law 102-575), as amended. 
The prepayment--
            (1) shall result in the United States recovering the net 
        present value of all repayment streams that would have been 
        payable to the United States if this Act was not in effect;
            (2) may be provided in several installments to reflect 
        substantial completion of the delivery facilities being 
        prepaid, and any increase in the repayment obligation resulting 
        from delivery of water in addition to the water being delivered 
        under this contract as of the date of enactment of this Act;
            (3) shall be adjusted to conform to a final cost allocation 
        including costs incurred by the Bureau of Reclamation, but 
        unallocated as of the date of the enactment of this Act that 
        are allocable to the water delivered under this contract;
            (4) may not be adjusted on the basis of the type of 
        prepayment financing used by the District; and
            (5) shall be made such that total repayment is made not 
        later than September 30, 2022.

            Passed the Senate November 2, 2011.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
112th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 808

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

  To direct the Secretary of the Interior to allow for prepayment of 
  repayment contracts between the United States and the Uintah Water 
                         Conservancy District.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CURRENCY>                            CANADIAN DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                    .65
<CASH>                                         245,182
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   64,333
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               309,515
<PP&E>                                          86,897<F1>
<DEPRECIATION>                                (26,139)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,007,492
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          299,037
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    13,788,855
<OTHER-SE>                                (10,080,400)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,708,455
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               159,118
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,828,366
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              14,449
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (5,683,697)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.30)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>NON-CURRENT INVESTMENT IN DEBENTURES RECEIVABLES IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,637,219
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Form S-8
Registration Statement No. 333-92725 and No. 333-130791 of Kentucky
Bancshares, Inc., of our report dated January 27, 2006, except for Note 21
with respect to a pending acquisition, as to which the date is February 24,
2006, on the consolidated financial statements of Kentucky Bancshares, Inc.
as of December 31, 2005 and 2004 and for each of the three years in the
period ended December 31, 2005, as included in the registrant's annual report
on Form 10-K.


/s/Crowe Chizek and Company LLC
Crowe Chizek and Company LLC

Lexington, Kentucky
March 21, 2006

93
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          48,881
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     50,292
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          31,870
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            31,319
<LOANS>                                        661,851
<ALLOWANCE>                                     10,885
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 810,443
<DEPOSITS>                                     670,336
<SHORT-TERM>                                    37,500
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              7,289
<LONG-TERM>                                      6,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        53,345
<OTHER-SE>                                      35,973
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 810,443
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 62,748
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                6,748
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                69,496
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              31,441
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              34,399
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           35,097
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    4,871
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 14,835
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 16,444
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      16,444
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    10,024
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.36
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.13
<LOANS-NON>                                      7,205
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                 2,106
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 13,100
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 8,105
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    2,237
<RECOVERIES>                                       146
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               10,885
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            10,885
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                          2,000
<FN>
INCLUDED IN NONINTEREST EXPENSE IS $700,000 OF PROVISION FOR VALUATION
ALLOWANCE ON LOANS HELD FOR SALE.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit
10.27


 


AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO


STANDARD CONSULTING AGREEMENT


 


This Amendment No. 2 (“Amendment”) to the Standard Consulting Agreement (“Agreement”)
previously entered into between the Parties hereto is entered into to by and between AeroVironment, Inc. (“AV”), and
General Charles R. Holland, USAF, Retired (“Consultant”). Except
where otherwise defined herein, the capitalized terms used in this Amendment
shall have the respective meanings assigned to such terms in the Agreement.  This Amendment is made
with reference to the following Recitals:


 


RECITALS


 


A.            AV and Consultant are Parties to that
certain Standard Consulting Agreement, dated as of November 1, 2008 (“Agreement”),
which provides for Consultant to render certain specified services to AV during
the term of the Agreement; and


 


B.            The Parties hereto desire to amend the
Agreement on the terms set forth in this Amendment.


 


NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereto hereby agree to
amend the Agreement as follows:


 


AGREEMENT


 


1.               Section 2. Term, is modified to extend
the Term of the Agreement to December 31, 2012.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this
Amendment with an effective date of December 17, 2009.


 


	
   

  	
  AEROVIRONMENT, INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Tim Conver

  
	
   

  	
  Name:

  	
  Tim Conver 

  
	
   

  	
  Its:

  	
  President &
  Chief Executive Officer

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  CONSULTANT:
  GENERAL CHARLES R. HOLLAND, USAF, RETIRED

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ Charles Holland

  
	
   

  	
  Name:

  	
  Charles Holland
Exhibit 10.5

Confidential

LOGO

Interoffice Memorandum



|      |  |                                                            
|----- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------
|To:   |  | Personnel File                                             
|      | 
|From: |  | David M. Wurzer, EVP, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|      | 
|Date: |  | January 24, 2007                                           
|      | 
|Re:   |  | Amendment to Employment Agreement dated September 1, 2006  



---

I, David M. Wurzer, (the Executive) signed an Employment Agreement (the Agreement) with my employer, CuraGen Corporation (the Company), on or about September 1, 2006, providing that the
Executives initial base salary shall be subject to increases by the Board of Directors, which shall review the salary periodically. Therefore, pursuant to the minutes of the January 24, 2007, Meeting of the Compensation Committee of the
Board of Directors, the Executives 2007 base salary will be adjusted to $318,000 per year, payable in bi-weekly installments.

Unless explicitly
changed in the Addendum dated January 24, 2007, all other terms of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.



|                          
|--------------------------
|/s/ David M. Wurzer       
|David M. Wurzer           
|                          
|/s/ Frank M. Armstrong, MD
|Frank M. Armstrong, MD
# C_2019432EN.01001401.xml

| 23.12.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 432/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.12.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 432/14

---

Appeal brought on 10 April 2019 by Etnia Dreams, S.L. against the judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) delivered on 13 February 2019 in Case T-823/17, Etnia Dreams v EUIPO — Poisson (Etnik)

(Case C-296/19 P)

(2019/C 432/16)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Appellant: Etnia Dreams, S.L. (represented by: P. Gago Comes, abogado)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office

By order of 6 November 2019, the Court of Justice (Tenth Chamber) dismissed the appeal and ordered Etnia Dreams, S.L. to bear its own costs.

---
#### Khalifah Abd-Al Muhaymin FARUQ, Appellant, v. Sgt. Benjamin LITTLE, Siloam Springs Police Department; James Hodges, Siloam Springs Police Department; Randy Williams, Concorn, Oklahoma on behalf of Williams Trucking on behalf of A & W Trucking; Norman F. Muelleman, Jr., Springdale Police Department; Beth Echols, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, Benton County, Arkansas; Robert Balfe; Brenda Deshields; Lynette Gahnish; Sandy Lutjen; Robin Green; Brandon Carter; B.R. Austin; Siloam Springs, Arkansas, City of; Siloam Springs Police Department; Sgt. Moss, Appellees.

No. 07-3799.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 29, 2008.

Filed: Jan. 8, 2009.

Before WOLLMAN, SMITH, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Khalifah Faruq appeals following the district court’s1 dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, and the denial of his motion for relief from judgment. He has filed a motion for appointment of counsel and a motion to remand the case.

After de novo review, *see Moore v. Sims,*200 F.3d 1170, 1171 (8th Cir.2000) (per curiam), we conclude that dismissal was proper. We further conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Faruq’s motion for relief from judgment. *See Arnold, v. Wood,*238 F.3d 992, 998 (8th Cir.2001) (standard of review; upholding denial of plaintiffs Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion where motion largely reasserted contentions made in earlier motions and failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances warranting post-judgment relief).

Accordingly, we affirm, *see*8th Cir. R. 47B, and we deny Faruq’s pending motions.

1

. The Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Beverly Stites Jones, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas, now retired.
# C_2020339EN.01002001.xml

| 12.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 339/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 339/20

---

Judgment of the General Court of 8 July 2020 — Teva Pharmaceutical Industries v EUIPO (Weniger Migräne. Mehr vom Leben.)

(Case T-697/19) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for EU word mark Weniger Migräne. Mehr vom Leben. - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2020/C 339/25)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd (Petah Tikva, Israel) (represented by: J. Bogatz and Y. Stone, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: L. Rampini and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 August 2019 (Case R 779/2019-5), relating to an application for registration of the word sign Weniger Migräne. Mehr vom Leben. as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 413, 9.12.2019.

---
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO****18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,****AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO****SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

                Thiscertification is not to be deemed filed pursuant to the Securities Exchange Actof 1934, as amended, and does not constitute a part of the Quarterly Report ofUTStarcom, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the periodending June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”).

 

                Inconnection with the Report, we, Hong Liang Lu and Francis P. Barton, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(i)                                                       The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(ii)                                                    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Dated: October 19, 2007 

 
| By:    | /s/ HONG LIANG LU                                            |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Name: Hong Liang Lu                                          |   |
|   | Title: Chief Executive Officer                               |
|   |                                                         |   |
|   |                                                         |   |
| By:    | /s/ FRANCIS P.  BARTON                                       |   |
|   | Name: Francis P. Barton                                      |   |
|   | Title: Executive Vice President and Chief Financial  Officer |

 

1

----
# C_2019432EN.01005701.xml

| 23.12.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 432/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.12.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 432/57

---

Order of the General Court of 24 October 2019 — United Kingdom v Commission

(Case T-188/19) (1)

(Action for annulment - Research and technological development and space - Seventh framework programme of the Union - Audit - Failure to fill out work timesheets - Personnel costs declared ineligible - Decision of the Commission to adopt the audit report as final - Inadmissibility)

(2019/C 432/68)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: S. Brandon and Z. Lavery, Agents, and by T. Johnston and J. Scott, Barristers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal, A. Kyratsou and M. Siekierzyńska, Agents)

Re:

Application pursuant to Article 272 TFEU seeking a declaration that, in adopting as final the Final Audit Report, bearing reference number 14-BA 226-013 concerning the implementation of the Combine, EUFAR and THOR grant agreements the beneficiary of which is the Met Office, the national meteorological service attached, within the United Kingdom Government, to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, the Commission failed correctly to interpret and apply the contractual provisions relating to those projects.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is ordered to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 172, 20.5.2019.

---
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 907 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the reduction in 

the deductible portion of expenses for business meals and entertainment. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 5, 2011 

Mr. INOUYE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal 

the reduction in the deductible portion of expenses for 

business meals and entertainment. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF REDUCTION IN BUSINESS MEALS 

4 AND ENTERTAINMENT TAX DEDUCTION. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 274(n)(1) of the Internal 

6 Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to only 50 percent of meal 

7 and entertainment expenses allowed as deduction) is 

8 amended by striking ‘‘50 percent’’ and inserting ‘‘80 per9 cent’’. 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 907 IS

1 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 274(n) of 

2 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 

3 paragraph (3). 

4 (c) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The heading for sec5 tion 274(n) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 

6 amended by striking ‘‘ONLY 50 PERCENT’’ and inserting 

7 ‘‘PORTION’’. 

8 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

9 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

10 December 31, 2011. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
1 Joh n T. Boyd, Chief Justice (Ret.), Sev enth Court of Appeals, sitti ng by assignment. Tex . Gov ’t

Code Ann. §7 5.002(a)(1) ( Vernon Supp . 2003).

NO. 07-03-0381 -CR IN THE COU RT OF APP EALS FOR THE SEVENT H DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMA RILLO PANE L E OCTOBER 21, 2003

______________________________ HAROLD C HRISTOPH ER ALA NIZ, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

_________________________________ FROM THE 47 TH DISTRICT COURT OF RANDALL COUNT Y; NO. 14,760-A; HON. HAL MINER, PRESIDING

_______________________________ ORDER OF DISMI

SSAL

_______________________________ Before QUINN and REAVIS, JJ., and BOYD, S.J. 1 Har old Chr isto phe r A laniz

app ealshis conviction for Aggravated A ssault. He pled guilty to the offense in accordance with a plea bargain and confessed to the accusations in the indictment. Up on determ ining that his plea was know ing and voluntary, the trial court found him guilty of the offense and as sesse d punishment within the range2

recom mende d by the prosecutor. As pa rtof the bargain, appellant also waived his right to appea l, an d the tr ial court ce rti fied , pursu ant to T exas Rule of Ap pell ate Pr ocedure 25.2(a)(2) and (d), that he had no right to app eal. According to Rule 25.2(a)(2) of the TexasRules of Appellate Procedure, the trial court mu st certify w hether or not the app ellant has the right to appeal. If such a cer tification has not been ex ecuted, the appeal m ust be dism issed. T EX . R. A PP . P
. 25.2(d). Here, the trial court did not certify that appellant had a right to appeal; quite the contrary, thr

oug h th e ce rtificat io n it s tated t hat he d id no t. Ac cor

ding ly, theapp eal is dism issed per

Texa s Rule of

AppellateProce dure 25. 2(d).

Per Curiam Do not publish.3